Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
d-29522House OversightOther

Mentoring Approach at Carnegie Mellon Discussed in Internal Document

The passage only describes pedagogical methods and mentions a professor at CMU, without any allegations, financial flows, or links to powerful officials. It offers no actionable investigative leads. Describes shift from lecture to Socratic mentoring. Mentions Lynn Carter, professor of software engineering at CMU. Discusses broader philosophical questions about schools.

Date
November 11, 2025
Source
House Oversight
Reference
House Oversight #023961
Pages
1
Persons
0
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

The passage only describes pedagogical methods and mentions a professor at CMU, without any allegations, financial flows, or links to powerful officials. It offers no actionable investigative leads. Describes shift from lecture to Socratic mentoring. Mentions Lynn Carter, professor of software engineering at CMU. Discusses broader philosophical questions about schools.

Tags

teaching-methodshigher-educationeducationhouse-oversight

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
What Can We Do About [t? 275 people who have been teaching in the usual way. But they pick it up and often find that they like it better. Here is Lynn Carter, one of the first mentors we trained to teach in this new way at CMU’s West Coast campus. He is a professor of software engineering at Carnegie Mellon University. It has taken me a while to figure out how to undo about 25 years of teaching experience that was standing in front of a room and talking, but I really like it. I enjoy interacting with students. As much as I enjoy standing in front of students and talking, it is much mote satisfying to be dealing with smaller groups, more of a one-on-one interaction. Professors often complain that no students come to see them during their office hours. That isn’t a problem with us here. How did we teach Professor Carter to mentor Socratically? It wasn’t trivial to do, but it didn’t take that long either. Once a teacher gets the idea that his job is not telling but helping, he gets into the swing of it fairly easily. Training teachers to teach in the kinds of SCCs we propose for high school is more an issue of familiarizing them with the content, which will differ considerably from what they have been teaching. Handholding comes naturally to most people because they have been doing that kind of teaching all their lives with siblings and children. Lecturing is not a natural human activity and teachers are easily dissuaded from doing it as long as they are not being presented with a classroom of listeners. In the end, the real question is this: Why do we still have schools? This is a little like asking why we still have religious institutions. In fact, it is a lot like asking that question because you will get the same reactions. People get used to the institutions that have always been a part of their lives. The fact is that these institutions were cre- ated in a different time when knowledge was harder to come by and the economy was quite different. Religion is not my issue. Should we still have schools? Instead of answering this question by listing all the good things that schools provide—no one would argue that a literate population is a bad thing, for example—I will turn the question around: What is bad about having schools? Here is a list of what is bad. Following the list, I will explain what is bad about these things (assuming it isn’t obvious).

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.